"Thoughts on Regimental Fire and Fury for AWI" Topic

Am trying out Regimental F+F for the AWI. Posted my thoughts on the system here: link
Feedback welcome particularly experience with people's experience with recovery from disorder.

Thanks

Joe

Bro Phil and I have now done a dozen games with it, and enjoy it. It is ideal for solo as a relatively few rolls have a big impact. With an opponent, assuming equal skill, it will come down to the dice. A big unit going Out OF Ammo early on, or the outcome of a big melee, comes down to two ten-sided dice. As long as you remember it is a GAME, and can handle the element of luck, it is great fun.

Doc, thanks for your thoughts. I will admit that I don't use the out of ammo rule. I think it is already hard to get a decisive result on the CRT with ammo.
Don't all our games come down to the roll of the dice? When you have that big melee you try to swing it in your favor by disrupting the enemy, attacking a flank or having numbers on your side.
Cheers

Doc Legan

Yes, agreed, and we might consider doing that. But in contrast to, say, JOHNNY REB, there seem far fewer die rolls, and d10 vs 2d6; lots easier to roll a 1 on a d10 than to roll snake eyes and rout on a reaction test.

They are good rules. But we do fiddle with them a bit, as well.

I've been running AWI RF&F games since about 2013. I love the RF&F system because it's clearly written, playtested, works well, and efficiently handles a great deal of detail without bogging down. However, the AWI version seems to lack some kind of intangible AWI "feel". I can't put my finger on what's wrong, it's just a flavor thing.

I also dislike the most recent AWI supplement rules on skirmishing. It feels like a little too much chrome for the system.

That said, I really like the games, so I keep on playing AWI RF&F, and I have no intention of stopping.

- Ix

Nice idea

Wonder if someone has done SEven Year War or Napoleonic at Regimental level

Love it… have put on numerous games and learned from one of the masters at it Lowell Hamilton, one of Rich's H. editors and friends. Age of Eagles went with SYW era Age of Honor… so I imagine just like BF & F went to RF & F, this also could be figured out based off those similar game systems.

Thank you for the discussion.
Doc, never played Johnny reb so have no comparison. I think I will change the maneuver table to make a "1" a hold in place and make rally from disorder less likely taking from 5-10 to a 7-10.
YA, what rules on skirmishers? I maybe missed something. Skirmishers are just open order in AWI. Rich has added skirmishers to smaller ACW games but I have no experience.
Frostie, napoleonics at regimental level would be something.
YA and Mike, you both have not noticed a lack of retreats due to morale in your games?
Thanks
Joe

YA, what rules on skirmishers? I maybe missed something. Skirmishers are just open order in AWI. Rich has added skirmishers to smaller ACW games but I have no experience.

That's what I'm talking about. The addition of a new formation with spaced-apart stands (Skirmish in ACW, Open Order in AWI) adds a lot of fiddly rules, slows down maneuver, and doesn't really add much to the game. I think the game works better treating Extended Line as "open order" and Line as "close order". My stands are based in single ranks, so this way looks better too.

YA and Mike, you both have not noticed a lack of retreats due to morale in your games?

No, but… compared to what?

In RF&F retreats are a result of disorder + casualties, or hand-to-hand combat. Fire combat will only cause retreat of units that go Worn or Spent through stand losses; charges will tend to drive off weaker/smaller units. In practice, I find militia units tend to run off after after exchanging a few shots, and get chased off easily when larger professional units charge into them, because they're small units with low morale. Professional units tend to be bigger and have higher morale, so keep going longer and stand up to firefights. Hardened units are usually rated "veteran" or "elite" and typically good for a bunch of firefights and charges. A big elite unit (like some of Cornwallis's units at Monmouth) tend to just stomp all over everything.

Other systems may have retreats or routs more often and with fewer stands lost (esp. games without stand removal), but that's just a difference in mechanics.

I think RF&F stand losses seem too high for the AWI. In real life, not that many AWI soldiers fell as a result of fire, but RF&F units tend to shrink, and robust units shrink a lot. Last year I started toying with the idea to use rocks to track "losses" and only pull one stand per 3 or 4 rocks (thus no unit is carrying too many rocks, and units only lose 1-2 stands before stopping or routing). I haven't tried this yet, so I don't know how well it works. I'd probably have to change the way unit labels work, because I worry about the confusing mismatch between stand losses, rock count, and unit thresholds on the label.

- Ix

Phil and I did Monmouth, and it is true the board became very packed with markers for morale and ammo. But it was a great game nevertheless.

As a side note, Joe Legan: I still haven't seen your post in the OP link, because my browsers all refuse to load that web site. There is a technical issue with certificate security that prevents casual access by phone or tablet, the company firewalls at work deny access categorically (they say it's "unsafe"), and I haven't been home long enough in the last few days to work around the problem with at-home hackery on my personal computer.

Doc, agree it is a great game; don't misunderstand. I am just tweaking it. The engine is sound.
After reading YA's post I think I understand my issue. It isn't with the combat table or the morale rules per se. It is fresh units nevert retreat unless in melee even if disordered. That just seems odd because you have to be lucky or take many shots to wear down a unit. I think removing the +2 for fresh units "in combat" might fix my problem. Then worn would be -1.
YA. Thanks for your insight. Does your browser block all blogspot addresses? My site contains no advertising at all so that is odd. I am sorry

Joe

I don't understand the complaint "never retreat". First of all, Fresh reliable units shouldn't be retreating unless hit hard and reeling; second, the war had lots of unreliable units that would retreat too soon and without orders, especially militia.

Consider:
A Fresh militia unit standing disordered in line in the open has a 20% chance of retreating. Militia should also be Raw and have a Provisional commander (because militia signed up to follow their colonel, not some up-jumped stranger from another colony), which increases the chance to 40%. Militia are typically small (3-5 stands) and Dispirited, which means they are only one stand of casualties from being Spent, which stops them from advancing and makes them 80% likely to move away on a maneuver test in disorder, and even 20% likely to panic in Good Order. Militia are actually pretty hard to hold together in this game, unless you put them behind cover or friendly units.

The original RF&F engine was for the ACW, where it's okay that units have a lot of similarity. To play the AWI, the units have to be tuned with all of the chrome and factors provided to behave according to their character. I use existing chrome and some of my own to give units as much period character as possible:

• Lots of militia had no bayonets, so can't charge with Cold Steel, can't use presented bayonets, and are at a disadvantage in Charge combat (-1 no bayonets). I also allow them only two formations: March Column and Line. Sometimes I have a special unit of rifle-armed backwoods militia (like Morgan's Rifles) that can only use Open Order and March Column.
  
• Jägers famously had swords instead of bayonets, so could charge with Cold Steel, but still -1 no bayonets and unable to use presented bayonets.
  
• To make Hessian infantry properly slow and stodgy, I disallow them DoubleQuick moves and Open Order (skirmishing was for Jägers). Combined with their large typical unit sizes (10-15 stands) and ratings of Trained and Reliable, this makes them feel a bit cumbersome in action, especially with lots of terrain around. Hessian grenadiers get higher ratings and smaller unit sizes, but still no DoubleQuick or Open Order.
  
• I disallow Continentals and State Line through 1777 (before von Steuben) Open Order, and usually rate them Trained, with variable effectiveness not exceeding Reliable. Sizes vary according to scenario, but the large units are still only 7-8 stands. I sometimes think they shouldn't be allowed Field Columns either, but I'm not sure how much difference it makes.
  
• British regulars and 1778+ Continentals and State Line are really the "normal" units in the game, with average sizes (6-8 stands), middling ratings, full maneuver options, bayonets, etc. with the exceptional troops like light infantry, grenadiers, and Scots tending to have high ratings (Veteran or Elite, Spirited).

I haven't got enough French to play with yet, so I haven't even researched them, and have no opinions about how they should work on the table.

- Ix

About the web site problem: it's not a problem at home, only on my phone and at work. I finally got to read the blog post!

YA, thanks for the discussion and explanation. Am traveling this weekend so can't look at tables. My issue is that a fresh, disordered unit will rarely not recover and will never fall back. Maybe that is realistic but seems off. I would think disordered troops would sometimes not rally and might even pull back a ways occasionally to sort out. Did this not happen?
Thanks again. You are more experienced than I.

Joe

I still don't understand why you expect more retreats from fresh units. A Fresh unit is fresh – few or no casualties, no fatigue, all officers present and active, the rank and file ready to fight. Why would such a unit retreat? The officers and non-coms are fixing disorder constantly – that's part of linear warfare. They can do it under fire too.

Disorder just means the ranks and files are messed up. The Maneuver Chart shows how long it takes the officers and non-coms to fix this before the unit can continue to maneuver and fight. There is a chance of failure (and even really bad failure) built into that chart, and some of the failures result in retreat, but some are just delays before resuming action.

I think you should mess around with all of the available unit parameters before you start changing the mechanics. If your units aren't retreating often enough, rate them lower and pay attention to all the factors that would affect them, like I illustrated above. The effect you're looking for starts to happen a lot more as units get Worn or Spent, outmaneuvered or outnumbered, and left out of command (officers too far away/wounded/killed). It (obviously) affects units with less Experience (Trained/Raw) and lower Effectiveness (Unreliable, Dispirited) much faster. A sizeable Elite or Veteran unit rated as Spirited or Reliable is quite likely to keep going through adversity for a long time, but that's why we call them "good" units – continuing to follow orders despite casualties and mortal danger is what defines a "good" unit in combat.

Keep in mind that the turns are 10-15 minutes long, and the ground scale is about 25yd/inch. Adjust your mental picture of the battle accordingly. How long does it really take to make a unit fail morale badly enough to retreat without orders? For militia, I would expect that answer to be "right away" in many cases, and the Maneuver Chart allows this for circumstances that make narrative sense (in line, outflanked, in the open, officers too far away, etc.). For grenadiers, I would expect the answer to be "only after a lot of combat", and again, that's what I see in the Maneuver Chart.

- Ix

YA, was on a baseball trip with my son.
Perhaps you are right I just don't understand linear warfare. And your points about customizing your forces makes perfect sense. I just didn't realize fresh units in command were so resilient. A disordered, trained fresh unit in command has an 80% chance of complete recovery. A veteran unit 90%. That seems high to me but you are saying it is correct as is the designer.
That just seems very high to this ill-informed person. : )

Joe

I think YA's explanation very reasonable, and also the rule.

However (and maybe Joe is thinking along these lines) I think I have read of ACW regiments losing one man to a single shot and the entire unit taking to its heels. And that could surely happen with green troops or militia. And it can happen in e.g. JOHNNY REB as "first casualty" requires a reaction test and a snake eyes roll is an instant rout.

It is largely a matter of taste, I think, how "wild and unpredictable" players prefer the rules to be. My own preference is predictable with an opponent, but more random for solo play.

And YA, thanks for the notes on customizing various AWI units. One of these days I'll get all my Brigade Games jaegers (mtd and un-) painted and into play.

YA, was on a baseball trip with my son.

Extra points for being a good dad!

I think I have read of ACW regiments losing one man to a single shot and the entire unit taking to its heels. And that could surely happen with green troops or militia.

That is totally built into the RF&F charts too.

Put a whole brigade of Raw/Dispirited militia units in a line where they each receive fire, and see how many are still standing after the next Maneuver roll. There's a reasonable chance one or more withdraws, and a small but non-zero chance one breaks and runs.

There's also a good chance they'll all remain in line. In fact, some will probably remain in line no matter what else you want them to do.

There are a lot more results built into the Maneuver table than just "all good" and "run away". A dear departed friend used to call the game "Fire and Frustration" because he hated the results of failing to roll high enough on the Maneuver table. (FWIW, I find RF&F and the new BF&F v2 to be much less frustrating; the Maneuver table has been adjusted to disfavor complete inaction.)

And it can happen in e.g. JOHNNY REB as "first casualty" requires a reaction test and a snake eyes roll is an instant rout.

I'm not one to argue with either John Hill or Rich Hasenauer, but they took different approaches to representing the ACW battlefield, and there are bound to be disagreements about the process and results. <shrug> That's wargaming.

- Ix